Battling with waves and lawyers : $b a genuine history of perils of the deep and an authentic record of the most important shipping case ever dealt with in the supreme courts of Australasia
History
Battling with waves and lawyers : $b a genuine history of perils of the deep and an authentic record of the most important shipping case ever dealt with in the supreme courts of Australasia
Alert (Ship : 1877-1893); Liability for marine accidents; Navigation -- Australia -- History; Shipwrecks -- Australia -- Victoria
WILLIAM WATSON, examined by Mr. Purves, stated: I am a surveyor for
Lloyd’s Registry of Shipping. The British Lloyd’s is an institution
that has grown during the last sixty years. It is the biggest thing
in the world. A vessel that is “A1” at Lloyd’s has a character that
any man, who is interested in running risks, takes as a standard.
The document now shown me is a certificate stating that the _Alert_
was classed when first built “ninety A1,” fit to carry dry and
perishable cargo to all parts of the world. Below is a maltese cross
which indicates that she was built under special survey. (Mr. Box
here objected that the certificate given when the vessel was built
had nothing to do with the present case, and his Honour decided to
admit the evidence subject to the objection). Witness continuing
said, “ninety A1” is simply a distinction to show that it is not “one
hundred A1” nor “eighty A1,” but still an “A1” ship. The meaning
of “A1” is that the hull of vessel so classed is fit to carry dry
and perishable cargo. I knew the _Alert_ mentioned in Lloyd’s
certificate, and remember the alterations made in her. I did not see
her officially between July, 1893, and the date when she was lost
(December, 1893). My opinion of her was that she was a good little
ship. She was sea-worthy in every sense of the word, and was a very
nice vessel.
_Q._—What is a nice vessel—a plum cake is very nice but I would not
like to go to sea on one.—? _A._—A very smart craft I would call her.
I have been to sea, but I am not a sailor.
Cross-examined by Mr. Box: I was in the employment of Lloyd’s in
England, but not as surveyor. I was appointed surveyor, but did
not continue in it. I am no authority as to what risks insurance
companies will take. It is not a mere matter of premium. A risk
is taken on the recommendation of surveyors. I am not in receipt
of an annual salary from Lloyd’s, but I make surveys for them in
Melbourne, and I get paid for my services by the owners of the ships
in Melbourne whose vessels I recommend. I re-classified the _Alert_
in July, 1893. She was then in the Bay trade. I don’t know how she
came out to Victoria. I don’t remember when she was built. I never
formed an opinion as to whether she was built for the Bay trade only.
She was, in 1893 when I surveyed her, fit to go all over the world. I
did not go to sea in her, but I would not have been afraid to do so.
She was fit according to Lloyd’s rules, and that was enough for me.
It is not a rule of Lloyd’s that the grating over the engine room and
stoke-hole should be covered.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account